Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google's Obfuscated TCP

kdawson posted about 6 years ago | from the third-time's-the-charm dept.

Google 12

agl42 writes "Obfuscated TCP is attempting to provide a cheap opportunistic encryption scheme for HTTP. Though SSL has been around for years, most sites still don't use it by default. By providing a less secure, but computationally and administratively cheaper, method of enctyption, we might be able to increase the depressingly small fraction of encrypted traffic on the Internet. There's an introduction video explaining it."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Multimedia meltdown... the tough times have hit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25292479)

"Introduction Video" Where's the comic book?

No responses (2, Interesting)

owlstead (636356) | about 6 years ago | (#25292759)

Any reason why there are no responses here? Have they been obfuscated somehow?

kdawsonfud (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25292961)

Maybe KDawson has been obfuscated, to the sidebar, by the other Slashdot team members. Probably because he's posted so much FUD in the past that the other editors don't trust him anymore.

Not obfuscated, but... (1)

DP1149 (1357167) | about 6 years ago | (#25293497)

See, it already works! It changed encrypted to enctypted. There. Fixed that for ya.

Encryption must be made illegal. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25293851)

Enough is enough. We need to just outlaw encryption.
Anyone using encryption is probably a terrorist, or terrorist sypathizer.

Brilliant Idea (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25293925)

If this were to make it into the regular version of Firefox or Apache then it would be really useful, but it truly belongs in the kernel's TCP/IP stack.

wait...what? (1)

anthonys_junk (1110393) | about 6 years ago | (#25296417)

Is anybody else getting the feeling that this is a little half-baked?

Why could we not fix some of the cost/uptake issues with SSL to encourage broader uptake rather than implement some broadly unsupported kludge that provides minimal benefit??

Re:wait...what? (1)

OldeClegg (32696) | about 6 years ago | (#25296699)

> fix some of the cost/uptake issues with SSL

Yep. Perhaps even (oh, heaven forfend!) publicly administered certs.

Re:wait...what? (1)

USPTO (1266948) | about 6 years ago | (#25297743)

Spin off the authentication part of SSL from the encryption part, and roll the encryption part into an http extension. Patch apache and firefox with the extension and see the fraction of encrypted traffic on the Internet go from depressingly small to impressively significant.

Extra security (2, Informative)

DaVince21 (1342819) | about 6 years ago | (#25298249)

I foresee this bringing extra security to already secured sites too. Nice.
What would the general extra overhead be when this is implemented into TCP, though?

Host by google, not "Google's" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25300287)

alpha project bla, yea there's a monopoly on certs is the real problem not a technical limitation. Look at how many mail servers to TLS where possible.

An Essential Development (1)

maharg (182366) | about 6 years ago | (#25338595)

Thank you - something of this sort is essential for the semantic web to work as envisaged by Berners-Lee - ubiquitous osfuscation/encryption ensuring trust in the medium carrying the knowledge. With Moore's law, there are good prospects for making tcp have strong inbuilt security. I've long thought that some of the mechanisms in use (SSL, Cookies..) are at too high a level in the stack. So I review this as the start of a much-need re-factoring. Kudos !
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?